Re: Abraham RIDEOUT & MA/ME Descendants

My wife descends from this Rideout family through Ruth Rideout who married William Rideout in 1799.William was appears to be the son of William R. Rideout, and Ruth, the daughter of Benjamin.I have run into many discrepancies researching this family.

One item I have (no source) states:William R. Rideout (1733-1799)William was a sturdy, helpful citizen of New Brunswick, ME.He deeded land in ...1793 to son Nathaniel.He drew a pension because he was blind, which was caused by smallpox suffering [sic] during the Revolution in 1724. [Now, I'm no history buff, but I think they must be referring to 1776 era]...

One item I have (no source) states:William R. Rideout (1733-1799)William was a sturdy, helpful citizen of New Brunswick, ME.He deeded land in ...1793 to son Nathaniel.He drew a pension because he was blind, which was caused by smallpox suffering [sic] during the Revolution in 1724. [Now, I'm no history buff, but I think they must be referring to 1776 era]...

Another item:From a DAR book:William Rideout enlisted at Falmouth, Maine, and while in service lost his eyesight with smallpox.In 1790, he was placed on the invalid pension roll.In 1818 his pension was increased...He was on the Malitia[sic] Roll in 1820 of N. Yarmouth...Ruth was allowed a pension in 1849...

Another item:From a DAR book:William Rideout enlisted at Falmouth, Maine, and while in service lost his eyesight with smallpox.In 1790, he was placed on the invalid pension roll.In 1818 his pension was increased...He was on the Malitia[sic] Roll in 1820 of N. Yarmouth...Ruth was allowed a pension in 1849...

This leaves me with a number of questions:1. Which William lost his eyesight?2. Was the Revolution in 1724? ;)3. If blind, how could William Jr. have served in the Militia?4. I've also seen an earlier death date for William Sr., which would have him conveying land after he died.I think this is legal now, via a springing executory interest, but I'm assuming the author(s) meant conveyed while alive.So, is this accurate??

This leaves me with a number of questions:1. Which William lost his eyesight?2. Was the Revolution in 1724? ;)3. If blind, how could William Jr. have served in the Militia?4. I've also seen an earlier death date for William Sr., which would have him conveying land after he died.I think this is legal now, via a springing executory interest, but I'm assuming the author(s) meant conveyed while alive.So, is this accurate??Can anybody help clarify these discrepancies?